AGX-17

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6YL8dMSLJA The best and worst of the 90s, condensed into one convenient package.

I think ammo should be limited, but that limit should be balanced by allowing archers to do massively damaging critical hits given the right skills, stats and preparation (enough damage that an archer might be preferable to a raw DPS scenario.) A fighter doesn't usually run out of swords in an RPG, but archers who have a limited supply should be balanced out by giving them potentially massive offensive abilities, since they're going to be little more than a distraction or a corpse once they run out of arrows. Tell that to the Mongols. They conquered their way accross Asia and Europe with the bow, against the best medieval armor available at the time. A properly fired arrow will penetrate deep into the body through a suit of chainmail, a sword thrust might break some rings and leave a flesh wound. An axe is good for crushing a skull, but if that axe misses the uncrushed skull's brain is going to have a nice opening. An archer at range can take another shot. The bow is a force multiplier,put simply, an archer can deliver more force, concentrated in a tiny area, than a man swinging an axe or sword. Not just that, but in reality, archery builds strength and it takes strength. The bow is just one of a long line of tools used to improve man's capabilities. Ancient hunters didn't use swords or axes or clubs, they used spears, and with those spears they used levers to multiply the force of those spears. Simple obsidian blades mounted on shafts killed mighty mammoths thanks to an extra stick with a notch in it - a force multiplier.

Hahaha, do you realize how that sounds? Is there any other excuses you'd like to make for them? On the off chance that you're serious, can you imagine if every other RPG developer and fantasy author took that approach? Hyrule would be "The World", Middle Earth would be "The World", Brittania would be "The World". No thanks. I'd rather fantasy authors and RPG developers be creative. Calling an island "The Island" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "Recluce" or "Moonglow". [EDIT] Baldur's Gate could be renamed to "The City Gate", lololol. For the record, the ancient Britons were well aware that Britain was not "the world," they may have known their ancestors came from mainlaind Europe and they were certainly in contact with the mainland, maintaining trade with the Gauls and their ilk.

I feel more like characters should be able to excel in a couple of stats, (maybe more with some kind of pro-con balanced trait, a charismatic lush drinks a lot and runs from fights and husbands so he's not very tough or strong,) and be limited to an average range for their race for anything they're not specially trained or experienced in. Possibly penalized to some degree for more talent in a given area. I think racial bonuses should be minimized if they're there, (there's not that much difference between the overall capabilities of real human races; white men can indeed jump.) Something like cultural background, how the character was raised (and in what setting,) and personal history should play more of a role in a character's starting stats and abilities than something as archaic as race. We don't need more Elder Scrolls style "we black people sho is strong and loves us some watey-mellon, but ain't to sharp, if'n y'know whats I meens?" It's still amazing to me that they can get away with what is essentially bald-faced racism in those games. I agree that intelligence should be vital. Intelligence doesn't necessarily need to be limited to academic pursuits (because studying and knowledge is more about memory, something different from functional intelligence,) i.e. a highly intelligent fighter could develop novel, unique fighting techniques no others had thought of before, things along that line.

Well, the Romans at that point didn't know much of anything else. Africa's north coast was the only part ever known to them, and the Middle East beyond Judea was hostile land they'd tried and failed to conquer multiple times. Plus they had to deal with multiple Persian empires pushing back to the West over the life of the Roman state. This was meant to be an edit, btw, can posts be deleted by users here?

Of course, this is a time before astrolabes, compasses, astronomical clocks and the like. There are worse maps out there, even newer ones. So long as they got the gist right they were usable, since you could always rely on local knowledge to get from A to B to C and so on.

Factions are the most fundamental thing in any world of social creatures (your family is a faction, your city is a faction, your state or province is a faction, businesses are factions, charities are factions, religions are factions, individual churches are factions, clubs are factions, your nation is a faction, your political parties are factions, etc.) So they should be important to the plot even if you can't join. I don't know enough about any of them to want to join one. The word maiden implies a lack of worldliness or sexual experience. That's because Bethesda post-Morrowind are bad game designers (chalk it up to Todd "I love Xbox" Howard,) who believe in the casual experience of being the best at everything and doing everything with one character, rather than the roleplaying experience.

I don't think some of you understand how Steam games works. To work with steam, a game has to have the Steamworks API integrated into its program. https://partner.stea...cumentation/api The Steam API includes a number of features (access to steam community, updates, achievements, etc.) but it's also a form of DRM. Purchasing a game on steam is licensing that software's use solely for the Steam account that purchased it, unless it's bought as a gift. If the game is to be available DRM free, there will have to be a non-Steam version distributed through some other source. Now, before anyone goes shooting off on Steam DRM, remember that Steam can run in offline mode and any games you own with the account can be played without an internet connection after installation (which does require a connection.) Unless it's a multiplayer online game, of course. The thing with nearly all video games, if you actually take the time to read the license agreement, is you aren't actually buying games, you are licensing them. You are purchasing the license to play the game, you are not purchasing the source code to do with as you please.

By default it does. As soon as you go from "whats possible for PC" to "whats possible for console" you've limited your choices (memory, processing power, UI, controls etc.) Yep, in the early/mid 2000s previously PC-centered publishers (like Bethesda and Interplay) abandoned PC development in favor of consoles. That's how Interplay killed Fallout, and how Bethesda ruined The Elder Scrolls.

Victoria Kruger. Hasn't done much else though other than Trine, Trine 2 and DA2. A shame really. She has a "pleasant" voice and I would probably rather listen to her than Jennifer Hale throughout yet another video game (and I played both Trine and Trine 2 extensively) Jennifer Hale.... hoo boy. She's alright, but as soon as she tries to do a line that's meant to be humorous, witty, sardonic or sly she enunciates in such an obvious, cheesy way, like her audience is 6 year olds and they wouldn't get it if she weren't being as melodramatic as possible. Played Maya, it was comically easy. Maybe I was over-levelled or something. Badass threshers were the worst. This is why I don't look forward to my second play through. I don't like XP grinding, but it seems I'm going to have to if I don't want to get my ass handed to me every battle. I'm playing the original Borderlands. The two games are remarkably similar, except BL2 has a much better story (or rather, more apparent story). Part of Borderlands' charm was the simplicity and lack of story. The lack of a real antagonist was the problem, but it wasn't all this "player! you are the chosen one who must save pandora!" cliche stuff they're pulling in BL2. It was just everyone minding their own business on a chaotic planet. Near the end of BL2 Dr. Zed starts crying about Hyperion "kicking him out of his beloved home of Fyrestone," but he himself moved to every new hub town as you progressed through the first game and Fyrestone was left an abandoned ghost town without Hyperion involvement. They try to put in emotion and develop characters who were originally meant more as caricatures or lunatics and it didn't really work. Seemed disingenuous.

You think that's bad? Here's an ancient Roman map of Europe: http://upload.wikime...1st_century.jpg Hell, I saw an ancient Greek map in a book where everything was cubic. I really wish I remember what book or map it was...

If PE is going to be a historical documentary on PBS, sure. Might as well throw Peter Coyote into the mix, too. Not joking about that. I like Peter Coyote.

Bethesda did that in Fallout 3 with one of their quests. They had a bunch of cannibals holed up in a metro station who were whiny emos (stupid,) whose leader wanted to straighten out his flock and make them good by murdering an entire town JUST to drink their blood, but not eat the rest, because that would be evil. Bethesda's writers are terrible, by the way. Not that it wasn't self-evident.

You know what, this is exactly how I feel about the latest BioWare games. I'm finding that the only thing that has kept me playing is the NPCs. Most of the time, the main story ranges from average to weak. I think that's why I enjoyed ME2 as much as I did. As weak as the main story was, the fact that a good portion of the game dealt with quests associated with your party members was its saving grace for me. True, true. Maybe Bioware should collaborate with Obsidian on a project, and let Obsidian handle the broader storyline while Bioware focuses on companions and, (I can hear Chris Avellone's blood-curdling screams of fury now,) romances. As if EA would let that slide.

Because nothing gets blown out of proportions on the interwebs... ME3 still was a very good game 95% of the time, making me forget the sore taste ME2's complete lack of a story left there. ME3 was a good game, but a poor ending to an otherwise great series. Well, aside from ME2. ME2's gameplay and flow was much better than the first, but it's obvious that after the departure of ME1's lead writer they just pulled a lot of fecal matter out of their asses to fill the gap between 1 and 3. As is now usually the case with Bioware games, the characters are the best aspect of the game, and most make it worth playing. Except for Merill in DA2. I don't know what they were thinking with that mess.

And if you play on hardest difficulty you get those enemies from the very start. Not to mention no counter prompts. Guns will kill you in seconds. Also there is way more stuff in the game including puzzles, boss fights, etc. AC is certainly not a hard game but the fighting is a lot of fun. I still load up the challenge modes just to beat people up from time to time. The challenge isn't to win, it's to win in style. There is no argument that makes this design philosophy worse than any other. So, from those of us who have actually played the Arkham games, the video in question is verifiably a strawman that deliberately avoids many aspects of the gameplay to present it as a "plays itself" casual type game. The combat in it is good enough that the devs of Sleeping Dogs copied it to the letter and received praise for its combat. The most praised aspect of the game, in fact (the writing makes Bethesda's look good.)

And their relationship with the USA. They took power in Afghanistan thanks to US support. American anti-soviet interventionism was disastrous foreign policy and we'll be paying the price for dead men's idiocy for generations to come.

Well, think of the other 6 as distractions. When you've got a bunch of paladins, clerics, wizards and berserkers running around, the waifish guy in light/no armor seems like a low priority. Maybe he's the client who hired this band of badasses and sorcerers to see him through, we can deal with him (and his gold,) once we've dealt with the lumbering deathbeasts trying to cleave our skulls in twain. Indeed, real life "magicians" use prominent distractions to hide the real trick, diverting audience attention with flourishes and scantily clad women.

How about Necromancers as a legitimate profession? For a significant fee, those who are not thrilled by the prospect of death can pay a necromancer to prolong their life or bring them back for a few decades more. Some upstart necromancer starts raising milk cows on the farms outside of town? The Necromancers' guild will crack down on 'em! The player could use these services to avoid losing progress despite failing in a given task rather than saving and reloading. An honest trade, respected just as the smith and the butcher!

The number of a4 squared paper sheets that went into mapping the Rubikon project in PS:T... Gamers in the 80s were practically amateur cartographers. And that's just on the video side. I'm sure the P&P/TT GMs are still doodling out intricate dungeon maps to this day. Reminds me of the Monty Python "Architect Sketch."

R: "DIE, MONSTER! YOU DON'T BELONG IN THIS WORLD!" D: "IT WAS NOT BY MY HAND THAT I AM ONCE AGAIN GIVEN FLESH. I WAS CALLED HERE, BY HUMANS WHO WISH TO PAY ME TRIBUTE." R: "TRIBUTE?! YOU STEAL MEN'S SOULS, AND MAKE THEM YOUR SLAVES!" D: "PERHAPS THE SAME COULD BE SAID OF ALL RELIGIONS." R: "YOUR WORDS ARE AS EMPTY AS YOUR SOUL! MANKIND ILL NEEDS A SAVIOR SUCH AS YOU!" D: "BAH! WHAT IS A MAN? A MISERABLE LITTLE PILE OF SECRETS! BUT ENOUGH TALK, HAVE AT YOU!" The difference being that humans are the same species as humans, which, like all animals, have a genetic imperative to spread and diversify and multiply their genetic code. Cannibalism is resorted to only in emergencies by the sane, and only the insane derive pleasure from it. To engage in it would be detrimental to the species as a whole. It's not odd that predators would prey on other animals but not their own species. There are stupid, base animals like Bears (specifically the males,) that do cannibalize other bears, but like I said, they're base and stupid. Male bears will even eat their OWN cubs, they're so stupid and aggressive. At any rate, the concept of Necromancy is always depicted as evil madmen bent on enslaving the souls of victims they personally murdered or paved on a path of good intentions gone wrong (my beloved Julia, I cannot live without you! There must be some way...)

If you had a vicious (and loyal,) enough beast you could just let it hang out beyond the town walls so as not to terrorize the locals while simultaneously safeguarding your belongings. Assuming something nastier doesn't come along. And that's where the Stronghold would come in!

To be fair, as you progress in both AA and AC there are enemies who are immune to simple punching and kicking. There's a variety that blocks them and takes no damage, a variety that electrocutes you when you punch them, etc. At any rate, you are eventually forced to used varied abilities and tactics (claws, boomerang, takedowns, etc.) But the auto-aim criticism in an action game certainly still stands. Since discovering the connections between Chaos and difficulty and storyline (killing Weepers counts as killing innocents, even though technically you're doing them a favor if you put them down fast,) I've gone back to start a second run, trying to ghost and kill nobody. My original intent was to kill nobody but always blundered into trouble, so I'm using what I learn from those blundered missions (layouts, guard patrols, alternate paths,) to pull proper ghost runs on the second set of saves.

I thought about asking people how it was. But everyone's busy with XCOM. It's good. I had $50 and the choice was betwen Dishonored and XCOM (given a remake vs a new IP i'll take a new IP,) will definitely pick up XCOM when it goes on sale on Steam, but until then.... I AM THE RAT KIIIIING! Dishonored is a proper stealth game. It plays very much like Arx Fatalis and Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (shock.) The controls are slightly less unintuitive than the previously mentioned titles, but it's still an improvement over Arkane's prior efforts. The really impressive aspect is the huge variety of ways to complete objectives. The climbing/blinking aspect works well, and straight combat is extremely dangerous. If you're dealing with multiple opponents, you'd better have a plan to kill them all (and thus cause more chaos and contribute to worse endings,) or run like hell, because on normal it takes maybe 3 hits to get killed. Stealth is vital regardless of what degree of lethality you're aiming for. The AI is actually pretty decent, too. There are lethal electric barriers around that don't harm officers/soldiers but kill anyone unauthorized that you can hack/reverse, and after the first few goons get vaporized chasing after you they'll avoid it like the plague. And most importantly, you can also be the rat king, summoning swarms of plague rats to strip the flesh from enemies' bones (literally.) God, I am going to get the worst ending. I did those Granny Rags quests and it increased the number of weepers, cut the number of thugs, and Slackjaw, the leader of the bootleggers, offered me some quests due to his new lack of muscle, including a non-lethal way of eliminating those brothers at the brothel (that I couldn't figure out because the waypoint/objective marker system is bad and didn't say where to go to do the job, and Dunwall is a supremely convoluted place.) The poor guidance is one of the biggest flaws. It points you to a rune that's under an inaccessible building and you miss it and it's gone forever because you couldn't figure out how to find it.

Honest Hearts is my favorite. Aside from Tribals. The story behind the Sorrows is really the only major, glaring flaw to HH for me. The biggest irony is when Joshua Graham calls his people a tribe and explains that it's simply a linked family of families. Wonder why they chose to disregard that when coming up with the idea of the Dead Horses and Sorrows, who started as educated, literate youths who were aided in survival by the Survivalist's gifts of books. They must have come up with some coming of age ceremony that involved trepanation with cazador stingers along the way. In the end it's all just tangential to Joshua Graham's story, anyway. That's what really put it on the top for me.